International efforts to regulate deep-sea mining have reached a critical juncture, as recent meetings of the International Seabed Authority (ISA) concluded without agreement on a global moratorium, sparking warnings of irreversible ecological harm. The outcome follows June’s UN Ocean Conference in Nice, where nations pledged ambitious marine protections, but critics argue progress has stalled amid corporate and political pressures.
At July’s ISA Assembly in Kingston, Jamaica, 38 countries—including newly joined Croatia—called for a precautionary pause or outright ban on extracting minerals from the ocean floor. However, procedural delays and opposition from a minority of states blocked substantive debate on key issues, such as the deep sea’s role in climate regulation, alternatives to seabed mining, and gaps in scientific understanding of marine ecosystems. Palauan President Surangel Whipps Jr. condemned the rush to draft mining rules amid unresolved environmental risks, stating, “We are rushing to prepare regulations atop a foundation of scientific uncertainty… This is not urgency born of science, but acceleration shaped by external pressure.”
France’s Ocean Ambassador Olivier Poivre d’Arvor proposed a 10- to 15-year pause on exploitation, a position echoed by Panama and other nations. Advocates emphasized the alignment of such measures with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which mandates marine environmental protection. Yet the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (DSCC) warned that many governments who championed ocean safeguards in Nice failed to translate rhetoric into action at the ISA. “Governments must meet their promises by doing what it takes to implement a moratorium before it’s too late,” said DSCC Campaign Director Sofia Tsenikli.
The ISA Council, which met ahead of the Assembly, launched an inquiry into Canadian firm The Metals Company over alleged attempts to bypass international oversight and mine seabed minerals unilaterally. While welcomed by environmental groups, the investigation has not quelled concerns about the ISA’s ability to enforce accountability. Legal experts like the DSCC’s Duncan Currie stressed the need for swift action: “The health of the ocean depends on it.”
With the Mining Code still incomplete and no binding environmental safeguards adopted, observers fear the ISA is enabling a race to exploit fragile ecosystems. Two unresolved proposals—an institutional review of the ISA and a marine protection policy framework—could still shift the debate, but time is short. Upcoming UN and conservation summits offer fresh opportunities for decisive action, though advocates warn delay risks legitimizing an industry with untold consequences.
“Future generations will ask what we did to stop this,” said DSCC co-founder Matthew Gianni, urging nations to reject neutrality. “There is still a chance to prevent severe ecological damage—but only if governments stand up for science and precaution now.” As pressure mounts, the question remains whether global leaders will prioritize long-term planetary health over short-term economic interests.
